I see no value in atheism

[suncowiam]

I can't agree here. For some, the idea of having more gives hope, however misplaced, it is not up to anyone other than the person to decide what gives them solace or hope. And frankly, how does it hurt? As long as there is no fanaticism involved and it is merely the hope of something more, who does that harm?

It can lead to fanaticism so to disclude this is unfair to the topic.

I have a feeling most suicide bombers believe this.

I say the following and completely mean it. I'm sure its going to offend theists...

At times, I don't see a difference between the mentally ill and certain theists.

I mean if someone is clinically psychotic and delusional believing voices in their heads or hallucinations are real. What is the difference from other folks claiming god is real without further proof. One case, they get sent to a mental institution, receives help and medication. The other case, they get reinforced through community, culture and church...

 

[McBell]

What would you know of deities? You've gone out of your way to criticize others of their beliefs. I mean you've said that "God has slaves" but no I guess that's not rude either, is that it? Or is it your sick sense of humor that allows you to make such remarks? I guess I can't stand up for myself when someone is clearly out of line. Are you oblivious when others are out of line?

They don't like liars, pseudo intellectuals and tactless individuals, and you possess all 3 traits.

Thank you for further proving my point.

 

[Quintessence]

Beg your pardon, but what does being a theist or an atheist have to do with afterlives?

Still kind of waiting for someone to explain this one to me...

 

[thau]

Still kind of waiting for someone to explain this one to me...

The believer is close to certain they will continue to live on after death and what they do here on earth is a n enormous factor in God judging us. The atheist believes once you die there is nothing more therefore they make no provisions or changes in their life that may affect what happens to them later. That allows the atheist a certain “freedom” to take more chances here and/or not waste time trying to prove themselves to any God.

I do not ascribe to any charge that a believer shirks any duties to making this present a life a better life for those around them because they know it will not last. I believe the evidence shows most believers are every bit or more as charitable and responsible citizens of the world than those who care only of this life and nothing of the next.

 

[JoStories]

Babies are capable of not having a belief. Atheism is the position of not having a belief in theism. It is not a rejection as such that must be considered, it is simply the absence of a theistic belief. Something I assume is true of babies.

If you use that defintion, then yes, that would be correct. However, it is my position that atheism requires the abstract ability to reject the notion of God or gods. And in that case, I beleive I would be correct.

 

[JoStories]

It can lead to fanaticism so to disclude this is unfair to the topic.

I have a feeling most suicide bombers believe this.

I say the following and completely mean it. I'm sure its going to offend theists...

At times, I don't see a difference between the mentally ill and certain theists.

I mean if someone is clinically psychotic and delusional believing voices in their heads or hallucinations are real. What is the difference from other folks claiming god is real without further proof. One case, they get sent to a mental institution, receives help and medication. The other case, they get reinforced through community, culture and church...

Agreed. However those that are mentally ill can and do at times harm others. And while it is entirely too true that some fanatics have done similar harm, they are the exception, thank goodness. Most theists harm no one, other than. In your opinion, themselves.

 

[Quintessence]

The believer is close to certain they will continue to live on after death and what they do here on earth is a n enormous factor in God judging us. The atheist believes once you die there is nothing more therefore they make no provisions or changes in their life that may affect what happens to them later.

Okay, but not all theists believe in that god, and not all theists believe in some sort of afterlife. Plus, there are some non-theists who do believe in some concept of an afterlife. That's the problem I have with the OP. They're conflating (a)theism and (dis)belief in afterlives. They're separate belief structures and they don't have some one-to-one correspondence.

 

[thau]

Okay, but not all theists believe in that god, and not all theists believe in some sort of afterlife. Plus, there are some non-theists who do believe in some concept of an afterlife. That's the problem I have with the OP. They're conflating (a)theism and (dis)belief in afterlives. They're separate belief structures and they don't have some one-to-one correspondence.

I agree with some of what you said here. However, I am not familiar with that subset of atheism that believes there may be some afterlife but without any presence of a deity? That sounds pretty exclusive or foreign.

 

[Deidre]

I can't agree here. For some, the idea of having more gives hope, however misplaced, it is not up to anyone other than the person to decide what gives them solace or hope. And frankly, how does it hurt? As long as there is no fanaticism involved and it is merely the hope of something more, who does that harm?

Look around the world and answer that question yourself. Religion harms a lot of people.

 

[Curious George]

Look around the world and answer that question yourself. Religion harms a lot of people.

Religion helps a lot of people too. Seems like the big question is does it hurt more than it helps? Corollary questions are: What level of harm would exist without religion and What level of help would exist without religion?

 

[Quintessence]

I agree with some of what you said here. However, I am not familiar with that subset of atheism that believes there may be some afterlife but without any presence of a deity? That sounds pretty exclusive or foreign.

Not really, it's just in my culture (probably yours too) most people only pay attention to Abrahamic religions and ignore or are unaware of everything else. Buddhism is typically a non-theistic religion and addresses the afterlife. Plus there's the "spiritual but not religious" crowd which includes some non-theists who continue to follow some sort of afterlife concept, non-theist UUers who do, along with naturalistic folks who do that too, and probably several other groups I'm missing.

 

[suncowiam]

Agreed. However those that are mentally ill can and do at times harm others. And while it is entirely too true that some fanatics have done similar harm, they are the exception, thank goodness. Most theists harm no one, other than. In your opinion, themselves.

That's it. Religious folks get exceptions. It's all about exceptions for religion.

I don't try to debate religious folks about spirituality or internal growth. I debate those that believe in unfounded science. I debate those that defend their bigotry. Those that have specific notions of ethics revolving around arbitrary sin.

The problem is that in all cases, good or bad, the fundamental process is flawed. They do not draw their conclusions from reality. I'm fine with a little psychological affirmation. We all do that in our day to day to deal with stress. I affirm myself all the time going into business meetings or in sports so I don't get distracted with negative thinking. I get that part, but I completely acknowledge that I do this.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I personally find atheist depressing. I feel it's important to have faith in something and how many believe that once you die, that's it, which I know is not true.

People continually keep forgetting how things initated at the start, by which death remains as a precursor to life . Faith is for the living anyways.

 

[Curious George]

That's it. Religious folks get exceptions. It's all about exceptions for religion.

I don't try to debate religious folks about spirituality or internal growth. I debate those that believe in unfounded science. I debate those that defend their bigotry. Those that have specific notions of ethics revolving around arbitrary sin.

The problem is that in all cases, good or bad, the fundamental process is flawed. They do not draw their conclusions from reality. I'm fine with a little psychological affirmation. We all do that in our day to day to deal with stress. I affirm myself all the time going into business meetings or in sports so I don't get distracted with negative thinking. I get that part, but I completely acknowledge that I do this.

# that moment when you realize a like is not enough.

 

[thau]

Not really, it's just in my culture (probably yours too) most people only pay attention to Abrahamic religions and ignore or are unaware of everything else. Buddhism is typically a non-theistic religion and addresses the afterlife. Plus there's the "spiritual but not religious" crowd which includes some non-theists who continue to follow some sort of afterlife concept, non-theist UUers who do, along with naturalistic folks who do that too, and probably several other groups I'm missing.

I follow you, there is some parallels in those examples to my question. There is also the converse, e.g. the Sadducees of Judaism. They acknowledged their G-d but also believed there was no afterlife. And they were no fringe element back then.

I know very little about Buddhism but was aware some realms of it do acknowledge a higher being and others do not consider it. So how does "non-theistic Buddhism" give any thought to an afterlife? Is it reincarnation of some sorts where they believe they achieve higher perfection?

 

[LuisDantas]

I personally find atheist depressing. I feel it's important to have faith in something and how many believe that once you die, that's it, which I know is not true.

I just don't understand how anyone can have such odd beliefs. And I mean the first part mainly, although the rest is also so odd to me.

 

[LuisDantas]

Why would atheism even need to have "value"? Isn't it a far more natural, better question why the alternatives have any?

 

[LuisDantas]

I know very little about Buddhism but was aware some realms of it do acknowledge a higher being and others do not consider it. So how does "non-theistic Buddhism" give any thought to an afterlife? Is it reincarnation of some sorts where they believe they achieve higher perfection?

Heavens, no!

At least, certainly not by my understanding. I have actually explained on occasion why reincarnation is not possible by a Buddhist understanding, even while it is technically not entirely incompatible with atheism proper.

Buddhist views acknowledge this life known to exist, and tends to see afterlife speculations as unwise. I personally see them as outright unhealthy and dangerous, to say nothing of unrealistic.

Instead, Buddhist doctrine (as I understand it) is centered on interdependent origination and therefore on duties and responsibilities in this life. There are those who for whatever reason insist on attaching afterlife beliefs to it, but it is a very ill fit, at best.

 

[Stevicus]

I don't focus on the afterlife more than this one. The notion of simply dying and not going anywhere is not only depressing but I don't think it's true. I know the existence of spirits anyway. Life has a cycle so why is the idea of the afterlife having a cycle is implausible? There is energy that sustains us and that energy goes somewhere. It's like matter. It can't be destroyed, only changed.

I don't think it's all that depressing to consider the notion of dying and not going anywhere, other than oblivion and non-existence. You wouldn't exist or be aware of it, so what does it matter?

Considering the possibility of an afterlife could actually be more depressing when one thinks of all the myriad possibilities, based on whatever myths and legends have been formulated over the course of known history. (Even in the best case scenario, after a few million years, wouldn't it get rather boring?)

I used to think about it a lot more when I worked in the funeral business and had a chance to see different religions and their burial rites. Some of them seemed rather strict and elaborate, which seemed to carry the implication that if somebody screwed up the ritual or made a mistake somehow, the deceased would end up going to Hell, regardless of whatever kind of life he may have led.

If there is an afterlife, I don't even think it would necessarily follow that it would be someplace "perfect" or "idyllic." It could be just as screwed up and imperfect as this life. Even if there are such things as "spirits," if they're anything like humans, then they could be lying, too.

 

[Deidre]

Religion helps a lot of people too. Seems like the big question is does it hurt more than it helps? Corollary questions are: What level of harm would exist without religion and What level of help would exist without religion?

People help people. Religion is governed by people, and if people do good things, the religion shouldn't take the credit. However, when people injure or kill others because they are 'defending their beliefs,' that is why religion can be dangerous. Do you like my double standard?
^_^

The problem with religion is that it often seeks to take over other people's thoughts, lives, governments. I don't only look at the extreme cases as we see in the middle east in the past and today, but I look at the insidious ways it tries to infiltrate itself into the US government for example. Homosexual marital unions were once banned in America, why is that? Because of religion. So, I find that it has harmed more people than it's helped, and if good people do good things, let's just leave it at that. If you need to believe or fear a deity in order to do good, that's NOT good.